To:Y. O. MARTOV[3]

Published:First published in 1925.

      Sent from London to Paris.

      Printed from the original.Source:Lenin
	  Collected Works,

      Progress Publishers,1974,

      Moscow,Volume 34,

      pages141-143.Translated:Clemens DuttTranscription\Markup:D. MorosPublic Domain:Lenin Internet Archive

      (2005).You may freely copy, distribute,
	display and perform this work; as well as make derivative and
	commercial works. Please credit “Marxists Internet
	Archive” as your source.•README

February 5,1903

Iam sending you a copy of the Union’s letter and the draft of our
reply.[1]The reply was sent to Plekhanov who was to await your letter from Paris. Arrange
a meeting with P. Andr. and Boris immediately and answer Plekhanovas
quickly as possiblewhether you are satisfied with the reply or whether
changes are required. It would be desirable, of course, not to delay the reply
to the Unionists, but if changes are voted it will entail a pretty long delay;
perhaps unimportant changes can be disregarded. But, of course, if there is
disagreement on the substance of the question, it will be necessary to hold up
the reply (I am writing to Plekhanov about this) and have everyone vote.

Inmy opinion (with which V. I. and L. Gr. agree) the most important thing here
is that 1) the foreign section of the
O.C.[4]should be precisely a
section of the Organising Committee inRussia. The Unionists’ idea, I
believe, is to havetwosections with equal rights: one in Russia, the
other abroad. By no means can we accept or allow such an interpretation. The
O.C. in Russia must act cautiously (in this respect its announcement is
admirably drawn up), but inallmatters and inallapproaches
made to it, mustbehavewith the utmost formality and rigour, that is
to say, in such a way that it, the O.C. in Russia, controls every thing andno onein the Party can doanythingof a general Party
character or in the way of general obligations,unless authorised to do so
by the Organising Committee in Russia.

Yetthe Unionists, by their letter, recognise (or almost three-quarters
recognise) the O.C. and the more they recognise it, the more formally and
firmly must the Organising Committee behave. It is of the highest importance to
adopt the right tone from the very beginning and to take such a stand that the
Party position is made quite clear:eitherrecognition of thepresentO.C. andsubordinationto it,orwar.Tertium non
datur.[2]Even now there is every chance of obtaininggeneralrecognition, without offending or irritating anyone, but
without giving wayin the slightest degree.

2)TheO.C. should reduce the functions ofitsforeign section to a
minimum. The foreign section only “deals with” affairsabroad(in the sense of preparing for unity) andassiststhe Russian section. On every other question that goes the least beyond those
   limits, the foreign section of the O.C.must request the opinion and
   decision of the Organising Committee in Russia. I strongly urge,
   therefore, that the O.C. in Russia shouldas soon as possiblewrite
   a letter to the Union, the League and the Bund proposing that they should
   forma section of their own for exercising such-and-such
   functions. It is essential that the O.C. in Russia should indicate the
   “limits of authority” to its foreign section, and I propose below
   an outline of these functions withthreeand only three strictly
   limited items. I earnestly request you to discuss this draft as quickly as
   possible with P. A. and Boris and confirm it (alternatively, put changes to
   the vote). (We shall send all these data to
Yuri[5]as well,
   asking him to await the arrival of P. A. and Boris, who should do everything
   to hasten their arrival.)

(Ofcourse, P. A. could write a letter to the League, the
Union and the Bund Committee Abroad from here, but I
think this is in the highest degree undesirable, for people
will suspect a put-up job and a fiction. Better to wait a
week or two, and have the letter sent without fail from
Russia.)

Ialso believe we must think of electing a member of ours to the O.C. (the
foreign section) and vote on it in advance, for owing to the members being in
differentplaces this can take much time and it will be unpleasant if things have to
wait on this account. For my part, I vote for L. Gr.

Ipositively do not have time to write to Plekhanov as well. You will
simply forward to himat once both this letter and the reply to the
Union, and meanwhile I will drop him a line.

Allthe best.Lenin

[1]Seepp. 139-40 of this volume.—Ed.

[2]Thereis no third way.—Ed.

[3]Martov,L.—pseudonym of Tsederbaum,
Y. O. (1873-1923)—joined the Social-Democratic movement in the
nineties. In 1895 took part in organising the St. Petersburg League of
Struggle for the Emancipation of the Working Class. In 1900 helped to
prepare the publication ofIskraas a member of its editorial
board. At the Second Congress of the R.S.D.L.P. (1903) became minority
(Menshevik) leader, and from then on was one of the leaders of the
Mensheviks’ central bodies and an editor of their publications. After
the October Socialist Revolution opposed the Soviet power. Emigrated to
Germany in 1920.

[4]TheForeign Section of the Organising Committeeconsisted of
L. G. Deutsch, representing theIskraeditorial board,
A. I. Kremer representing the Bund, and N. N. Lokhov (Olkhin) representing
the Union of Russian Social-Democrats Abroad.

[5]MeaningtheYuzhny Rabochygroup. (See ^^Note 106^^.)